W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-xml-core-wg@w3.org > April 2015

RE: XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2015 April 23

From: David Ezell <David_E3@VERIFONE.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Apr 2015 15:33:29 +0000
To: Paul Grosso <paul@paulgrosso.name>, core <public-xml-core-wg@w3.org>
Message-ID: <54C00E24834FCE47B11EC129A84E7F78CCB4ABFD@VF2WDEXMB1.verifone.com>
I must send regrets for April 29.
I will be traveling for Petroleum Standards in Maryland.
Proxy to the chair.

From: Paul Grosso [mailto:paul@paulgrosso.name]
Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2015 9:51 AM
To: core
Subject: XML Core WG Status and Open Actions as of 2015 April 23

The XML Core WG telcons are scheduled for every other week.

Our next telcon is scheduled for 2015 April 29.
David gives regrets.

Status and open actions

XML Potential Errata
Comment that "or by the Byte Order Mark" is lacking in section 4.3.3:

Comment that an entity cannot "begin" with a BOM as suggested in section 4.3.3:

ACTION to John and Henry:  Review and comment on the above two comments
on the discussion of BOMs in section 4.3.3 of the XML spec.


Comment about documents with an "empty DTD":

Henry suggests we could probably make the XML spec clearer here;
see also his comments at

Paul sent the WG response at
and there was more back from the commentor at

Henry referenced Paul's email at
especially Paul's suggestion in point 4, though Henry wasn't
sure he agreed with the suggestion.

ACTION to Henry:  Post some suggestion(s) to the list about
how to address: Comment about documents with an "empty DTD".


Question about normalization checking in XML 1.1


John Cowan forwarded an email for us to consider at


which I've also forwarded to the xml-editor list at


for official/archive purposes.

Paul wrote some comments in email at


Henry checked with Richard who agrees it's a bug, though how

to fix it isn't obvious.  Probably the only candidates for not

being normalized are (internal and external) doctypes per email at


ACTION to Norm and Henry: Review the email about normalization checking

in XML 1.1 and suggest an appropriate corrigendum.

CMSMcQ raised a potential erratum against Namespaces at
with WG discussion started at

He says that our latest wording in the definition of 'namespace name'
(section 2.1) appears to say that an element with no namespace binding
in scope is in no namespace as opposed to saying its namespace is
unknown (thereby leaving the possibility that its namespace
information may be determined by some other methods).

Norm, Paul, and Henry posted some thoughts on this, and none
of us feel that the current wording is necessarily bad enough
to be worth any change.  In particular, Norm doesn't agree with
what Michael thinks should be the case.  Henry points out that
HTML5 does "make use of" defining namespaces without the
namespace spec mechanism.

Henry had some more (private) exchanges with Michael, and
Henry will summarize the discussion for the WG.

ACTION to Henry:  Summarize and provide current status of
the discussion of this namespace potential erratum.

Submitting XML Schema 1.1 to ISO
See also

We have decided we will first publish XML Schema 1.1 2E (with
approved errata).  After that, we would send XML Schema 1.1 2E
(only) to ISO.

Loren has offered to do the editorial duties, and David
talked to CMSMCQ about getting some more help in the details.

ACTION to Loren and David:  Produce a publication-ready version
of XML Schema 1.1 2E incorporating the approved errata.

It looks like there are 3 bugs for Structures, none for Datatypes,
but after checking with Michael, he found
which shows 8 errata items whereas bugzilla shows only 3.

We discussed

Henry figures we can just publish this document.

Loren believes the latest document includes everything,
so the next step is to push it through the tool chain.

We will need a diff (or list of changes); Loren says the diff
is already available.  Liam says we don't need a test suite if
there are no substantive changes.

ACTION to Loren:  Create the PER, i.e., XML Schema 1.1 Second Edition,
and post (e.g., at http://www.w3.org/XML/Group/2014/12/xschema11.html)
for the WG to review (talk to Paul if you need help so posting).

XInclude 1.1


On 2012 February 14, we published

XInclude 1.1 Requirement and Use Cases


On 9 October 2012, we published our FPWD of XInclude 1.1 at


On 15 January 2013, we published our (first) Last Call of

XInclude 1.1 at


and Paul sent the transition announcement at


(also cc-ing the chairs mailing list).

On 2013 October 8, we published the XInclude 1.1 CR at


We have published (another) Last Call 2014 December 16 at


The Last Call period ended January 17.  There were no comments.

On the Feb 4 telcon, the WG had CONSENSUS to take XInclude 1.1 to CR.

Paul drafted a Transition Request (including SOTD wording) at


Liam said Paul should send it to Ralph and PLH (not Philipp Hoschka).

Liam said we might not need a telcon.

Norm filed an issue on the Xerces issue tracker to support XInclude 1.1;

he has heard there is a possibility that the Xerces folks would do it.

Jirka has implemented a subset of an XInclude processor

in XSLT; it deals mainly with the new copy-attributes feature.

ACTION to Norm:  Continue to work toward getting XInclude 1.1

implementations and document them in our implementation report.

Note also the desire for another test case for the XInclude test suite per


Norm announces that he has one conforming implementation,

the one in XML Calabash, and he is working on another.

ACTION to Norm:  Update the implementation report and test suite.

ACTION to Norm:  Create the pub-ready CR taking into account the

wording/URLs in Paul's draft Transition Request (but make the

proposed pubdate [and corresponding URLs] some reasonable future


This electronic message, including attachments, is intended only for the use of the individual or company named above or to which it is addressed. The information contained in this message shall be considered confidential and proprietary, and may include confidential work product. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that any unauthorized use, dissemination, distribution or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and deleting this email immediately.
Received on Thursday, 23 April 2015 15:34:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Thursday, 23 April 2015 15:34:21 UTC